You said: “Strikingly, it appears that MacDonald had recognized and embraced the theological beauty of evolutionary theory within ten years of Origin of the Species.”

I’d say that it’s only striking from a modern perspective. The English had little issue with Darwin’s theory when it came out, and even those who did, made their case purely on scientific grounds.

Here is Bishop Samuel Wilberforce on evolution:

“Our readers will not have failed to notice that we have objected to the views with which we are dealing solely on scientific grounds. We have done so from our fixed conviction that it is thus that the truth or falsehood of such arguments should be tried. We have no sympathy with those who object to any facts or alleged facts in nature, or to any inference logically deduced from them, because they believe them to contradict what it appears to them is taught by Revelation. We think that all such objections savour of a timidity which is really inconsistent with a firm and well-intrusted faith..”

]]>By: EdwardTBabinskihttp://undeception.com/george-macdonald-on-gods-condescension/#comment-86407
Wed, 31 Mar 2010 04:02:06 +0000http://undeception.com/?p=1685#comment-86407Thomas Erskine is the universalist I alluded to. Perhaps the most frequently quoted passage in all his writings is this one:

“He who waited so long for the formation of a piece of old red sandstone will surely wait with much long-suffering for the perfection of a human spirit.”

Another favorite quotation is this one:

“The most zealous defenders of the verbal inspiration of theBible admit that there are parts of it of less importance than others.This is a great admission, because another is involved in it, namely that we ourselves must be judges of the comparative importance of these different parts.”

See David F. Winslow's biography, Thomas Erskine: Advocate for the Character of God

]]>By: Stevehttp://undeception.com/george-macdonald-on-gods-condescension/#comment-86408
Wed, 31 Mar 2010 02:38:06 +0000http://undeception.com/?p=1685#comment-86408Please elucidate what you noticed the first time. 🙂
]]>By: EdwardTBabinskihttp://undeception.com/george-macdonald-on-gods-condescension/#comment-76565
Wed, 31 Mar 2010 00:02:06 +0000http://undeception.com/?p=1685#comment-76565Thomas Erskine is the universalist I alluded to. Perhaps the most frequently quoted passage in all his writings is this one:

“He who waited so long for the formation of a piece of old red sandstone will surely wait with much long-suffering for the perfection of a human spirit.”

Another favorite quotation is this one:

“The most zealous defenders of the verbal inspiration of theBible admit that there are parts of it of less importance than others.This is a great admission, because another is involved in it, namely that we ourselves must be judges of the comparative importance of these different parts.”

See David F. Winslow's biography, Thomas Erskine: Advocate for the Character of God

]]>By: EdwardTBabinskihttp://undeception.com/george-macdonald-on-gods-condescension/#comment-92890
Tue, 30 Mar 2010 23:01:00 +0000http://undeception.com/?p=1685#comment-92890Thomas Erskine is the universalist I alluded to. Perhaps the most frequently quoted passage in all his writings is this one:

“He who waited so long for the formation of a piece of old red sandstone will surely wait with much long-suffering for the perfection of a human spirit.”

Another favorite quotation is this one:

“The most zealous defenders of the verbal inspiration of theBible admit that there are parts of it of less importance than others.This is a great admission, because another is involved in it, namely that we ourselves must be judges of the comparative importance of these different parts.”

See David F. Winslow’s biography, Thomas Erskine: Advocate for the Character of God